Most definitely. No reason to keep it open and split operations between two airports, esp with the higher-yielding traffic headed to one largely over the other.
mah4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31116 posts, RR: 74 Reply 6, posted (6 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 9992 times:
Quoting usairways85 (Reply 4): Likely all that means is the flight number will originate in MIA, highly doubt it will be the same aircraft on MIA-CLT-LHR.
Not quire sure. Might be a slot coming from AA/BA, which I think might require the plane to originate in Miami, too.
C010T3 From Brazil, joined Jul 2006, 3513 posts, RR: 21 Reply 7, posted (6 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 9993 times:
Well, the press release says:
The new service from Charlotte, N.C. will supplement the airline's existing daily service between its international gateway in Philadelphia and London Heathrow.
FL787 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1499 posts, RR: 12 Reply 8, posted (6 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 9998 times:
This slot pair is from AA/BA as part of their carve out which is why it originates in MIA. DL was recently awarded a pair of slots from the carve out which will be a third ATL-LHR flight originating in DFW.
C010T3 From Brazil, joined Jul 2006, 3513 posts, RR: 21 Reply 9, posted (6 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 9991 times:
Quoting FL787 (Reply 8): This slot pair is from AA/BA as part of their carve out which is why it originates in MIA. DL was recently awarded a pair of slots from the carve out which will be a third ATL-LHR flight originating in DFW.
Can we consider US on MIA-CLT-LHR an alternative allowed by the antitrust organs to replace DL's MIA-LHR?
Yes. The terms of the oneworld ATI were that they had to divest 4 slot pairs: 2 to BOS, 1 to DFW and MIA. If the DFW/MIA pairs were not used by 2013, they could be used for direct flights as we're seeing with US/DL.
C010T3 From Brazil, joined Jul 2006, 3513 posts, RR: 21 Reply 12, posted (6 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 9987 times:
Quoting FL787 (Reply 10): Yes. The terms of the oneworld ATI were that they had to divest 4 slot pairs: 2 to BOS, 1 to DFW and MIA. If the DFW/MIA pairs were not used by 2013, they could be used for direct flights as we're seeing with US/DL.
Well, thank you for the info!
I guess it's the end of an era, then. There will be no US airlines left at Gatwick.
USAirALB From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 2681 posts, RR: 1 Reply 13, posted (6 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 9412 times:
Been waiting for this for years, nice to see it will actually happen.
Quoting C010T3 (Reply 7): Well, the press release says:
The new service from Charlotte, N.C. will supplement the airline's existing daily service between its international gateway in Philadelphia and London Heathrow.
It's clear that Gatwick is as good as gone.
I'm not quite sure. Supplement usually means in addition to, does it not? The Charlotte Observer release says:
Quote: US Airways said the new flights will supplement existing service from Charlotte to Gatwick, and hasn’t reached a final decision on whether the Gatwick service will continue or be shifted to Heathrow.
skipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 2373 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (6 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 9372 times:
Once CLT-LHR is open, what do you think will happen to yields on CLT-LGW as US cannibalises it's own route? CO, NW, DL and now US all said they'd operate from both. Only DL lasted more than one summer at LGW after getting LHR slots.
usairways85 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 3097 posts, RR: 8 Reply 15, posted (6 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 9335 times:
With the current TA schedule including CLT-LHR hasn't US pretty much maxed out its 330s? If they want to continue CLT-LGW will it have to be a 762 or 752?
C010T3 From Brazil, joined Jul 2006, 3513 posts, RR: 21 Reply 17, posted (6 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 9052 times:
Quoting USAirALB (Reply 13): I'm not quite sure. Supplement usually means in addition to, does it not? The Charlotte Observer release says:
Well, I hadn't read the Charlotte Observer's article, but you see that the press release says that the service will supplement PHL-LHR, while the article attributes the supplement to CLT-LGW. Perhaps CLT-LGW will operate for the summer only to make US's case to axe it afterwards.
USAirALB From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 2681 posts, RR: 1 Reply 18, posted (6 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 8943 times:
Quoting skipness1E (Reply 14): Once CLT-LHR is open, what do you think will happen to yields on CLT-LGW as US cannibalises it's own route? CO, NW, DL and now US all said they'd operate from both. Only DL lasted more than one summer at LGW after getting LHR slots.
US indeed flew PHL-LGW after launching LHR, I forget how long it lasted for...I think they lasted more than one summer. It was a 752 at the end.
Quoting C010T3 (Reply 17): Perhaps CLT-LGW will operate for the summer only to make US's case to axe it afterwards.
I could see this happening. I have noticed that on the LGW end, US has attracted quite a leisure based crowd connecting onwards to Florida. I wonder if this will change with the switch to LHR.
shamrock604 From Ireland, joined Sep 2007, 4039 posts, RR: 13 Reply 19, posted (6 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 8485 times:
Not strictly related to the new LHR service, but is there any truth in the rumour that the two seasonal Euro routes from CLT (Dublin and Madrid) are not doing so great?
I'd agree with others about LGW - It's probably as good as toast, which LGW's new owners will not be pleased about.
Flown EI,FR,RE,EIR,VE,SI,TLA,BA,BE,BD,VX,MON,AF,YS,WX,KL,SK,LH,OK,OS,LX,IB,LTU,HLX,4U,SU,CO,DL,UA,AC,PR,MH,SQ,QF, EY, EK
fcaa321 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2011, 19 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (6 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 8109 times:
I flew with US into Gatwick overnight this Sunday and the flight was full in both classes! they were even offering incentives due to overbooking. Fab airline with a great inflight product - shame about the staff and flight meal.
ual777uk From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 3355 posts, RR: 1 Reply 21, posted (6 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 7681 times:
Quoting USAirALB (Reply 13): I'm not quite sure. Supplement usually means in addition to, does it not?
Its clear its supplementing LHR - LHR. Sorry to say but US days at LGW are nearly over but i think its a good move, more higher yielding passengers will use LHR and lets be honest money talks.
AussieItaliano From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 441 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (6 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 7516 times:
If only the authors of Bermuda II could see this! All US based airlines are now operating into LHR from all their US gateways. If LGW-CLT gets the axe, as I'm fairly certain it will, then only British carriers will be flying from LGW to the US.
Hope so. LHR is where people want to fly to when coming from North America for connections to other parts of the world, i.e. me. Now only if they could improve on their in-flight service that would be something.
jfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 7343 posts, RR: 7 Reply 24, posted (6 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 6664 times:
Quoting skipness1E (Reply 14): Once CLT-LHR is open, what do you think will happen to yields on CLT-LGW as US cannibalises it's own route? CO, NW, DL and now US all said they'd operate from both. Only DL lasted more than one summer at LGW after getting LHR slots
The logical event to happen is that USairways ends flights to LGW and starts LHR the next day. WHY would US run double London flights to both airports ? Does US even have enough planes for such a crazy thing.
25 skipness1E: They did it with LON-PHL with LGW reduced to a B757 and LHR getting the A333. It lasted a few months as much of the existing LGW traffic just used LH
26 southwest737500: Yep there getting 5 new A332 next year, GRU is getting a A332 next year, I have no idea when that routes starts
27 LAXdude1023: If DFW, IAH, ATL, and PHL could not support both LHR and LGW, no way CLT can.
28 USAirALB: I was wondering the same, however they are both still in the schedule and US recently talked about CLT-DUB during the SNN press release.
29 PHLwok: I flew PHL-LGW a fair bit back shortly after PHL-LHR started and before it was dropped as I had a client site relatively close to Gatwick. Loads were
30 brilondon: These are low yield customers, not the passengers that are needed to make money. The leisure crowd generally would like to go direct to Florida and g
31 HPRamper: So is Gatwick now basically a ghost town compared to what it was in years past? The only stories I ever read on here about LGW involve airlines leavin
32 jumpjets: Its not all doom and gloom, besides easyjets ever increasing presence Gatwick has recently attracted services to China Korea Vietnam and Turkey, to n
33 skipness1E: Have a look at the Flight Arrivals / Departures on http://www.gatwickairport.com/flights/arrivals/ It's as busy as it ever was and remains the busies
34 cipango: Completely disagree. All airports have a few airlines leaving, even LHR. LGW has done extremely well this year securing flights to Vietnam and China.
35 Maverick623: I don't think the yields were anything great to begin with... but either way it's not gonna be pretty for the LGW flight. I see this as the most like
36 Viscount724: EK still has 3 daily LGW-DXB in addition to their 5 daily LHR-DXB. Not certain but I believe EK may be the only non-UK longhaul carrier (other than U
37 skipness1E: Air China and Korean Air are both thrice weekly while they wait for a suitable LHR slot to open up. Vietnam Airlines is also four weekly.
38 cedarjet: I don't understand how LGW doesn't have a tonne of US routes, including by US carriers. The airport serves a massive catchment area of millions, in so
39 Viscount724: Regardless of the potential market, it's been proven over many years that yields are significantly higher at LHR. Serving two airports also increases
40 miaami: Do the terms dictate that the same aircraft type be used? If they keep the same flight number MIA-CLT-LHR, could US fly a 320 or 737 from MIA-CLT and
41 skipness1E: It's not complex and it has been covered off numerous times. To serve LGW long haul one ideally needs to duplicate a LHR service, as to not serve LHR
43 Maverick623: Yes. This is the standard for all TATL routes that US flies where the flight number doesn't originate in PHL or CLT. For example, US700 currently ser
44 southwest737500: I mean it not complicated LAX-CLT 704 A321 then it turns into CLT-FRA 704 on a A333 I took this flight in the summer it probably because they have a l
45 planesailing: It is a phenomenon of human psychology why the money prefers to fly from LHR over LGW. I worked for DL before they pulled the 9 from LGW. Whilst load
Sponsor Message: 
From Netherlands, joined Jul 2005, 76 posts, 
From Bosnia and Herzegovina, joined Jun 2005, 845 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 3097 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31116 posts, 
From Brazil, joined Jul 2006, 3513 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 2373 posts, 
From Monaco, joined Mar 2005, 1056 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Sep 2007, 4039 posts, 
From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 3169 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
